Courts Rule in Favour of Firm in $16 Million Dollar Sexual Harassment and Gender Exclusion Case

On 30th March 2015 The San Francisco Superior Court delivered a very important ruling on a sexual harassment case against venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caulfield and Beyers. They ruled in favour of the firm in one of the most historical sexual harassment cases of the last decade.

The case of Kleiner Perkins Caulfield and Beyers versus Ellen Pao, who sued the firm for gender discrimination and sexual harassment. Her complaint was the behaviours within the Kleiner Perkins Caulfield and Beyers had intentionally stalled her career and prevented her from advancing within the firm. She filed a detailed complaint about years of exclusion within in the company, where advancement positions were reserved only for men. She also made allegations of ongoing sexual harassment from one specific employees at the firm.

She stated that a male employee pressured her into having an extra-marital affair with him and that he began punishing her within the firm when that relationship ended. She claimed that eventually he sabotaged her position by excluding her from important emails, business trips and meetings. This eventually led to her dismissal from her job position within the company.

In response that Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Beyers gave was that Ellen Pao was incompetent and did not suit the position that she had been hired for. They claimed that she was dismissed not because of discrimination but because of poor performance.

This sexual harassment case was filed in 2012 but because of it’s complex nature a ruling was not made until March of this year. The courts ruled in favour of the firm and against Pao who lost her 16 Million dollar case. Despite the fact that Pao lost the case this particular sexual harassment and gender harassment the court ordeal is still considered to be a landmark ruling.